According to Jackson County School System leaders, this year’s bus transportation has been a mess. Every day, parents have to check online postings to see what bus their child will be riding on, or why their child’s bus may be running late.
There’s a lot of reasons for that problem: The system saw a huge jump in riders after it split the bus routes to keep elementary students off buses with older students; the system has an aging fleet of older buses that break down more frequently than newer vehicles; and because the local economy is booming and has low unemployment, the system has had trouble attracting part-time bus drivers who can easily find full-time employment elsewhere.

And truthfully, who wants to drive a bus full of loud, sometimes unruly kids anyway?
All of which begs this bigger question: Why should school systems in the 21st Century even be providing bus transportation, given all the other financial pressures schools are under? Shouldn’t parents be responsible for getting their own kids back and forth to school?
That’s heresy, of course. I can hear the screaming now: “No bus for my child?? How will I get to work on time???”
I’ve actually heard that said. A few years ago, the county school system looked at a proposal to stop transporting students who lived within two miles or so of the school they attended. The backlash was immediate as parents packed a school board meeting to complain about the idea.
At that meeting, one man stood up and said he worked in Atlanta and moved to Jackson County based on the idea that he could commute over an hour to work and have the school system transport his children back and forth. He was very upset that such an “understanding” might be changed.
To which I would say this: Why should the other taxpayers of Jackson County have to pay to subsidize his choice to move over an hour away from his job? What gives him the right to demand that other taxpayers be responsible for his childrens’ transit?
Most Jackson County citizens think of themselves as being “conservative.” They largely vote Republican and complain about “liberals” and what they see as too much “socialism” in the nation.
But here’s the reality: Modern day school transportation is nothing more than a government socialized transit program where everybody has to pay for the service even if they don’t use it. And in suburban communities like Jackson County, it is a public subsidy provided to families who choose to live a long distance from where they work.
We’re not talking chump change here.
This year’s transportation budget for the Jackson County School System is $4.2 million, not including the cost of buying new buses. That’s out of a total general fund budget of $70 million.
The JCSS spends almost twice as much on bus transportation as it does for its central support services and related expenses. That $4.2 million for transportation is almost as much as the system pays for all of its school administration staff combined (which is $4.3 million.)
That high cost is due in large part to the fact that Jackson County is very large geographically and very spread out.
If the JCSS didn’t have to provide transportation services, that $4.2 million could be used to pay down its debt, or fast-track the much-needed new high school in Braselton.
Or maybe those dollars could actually be spent on education rather than transportation.

School bus transportation began in the early 20th Century as a way to transport rural children to distant schools. Few rural families had cars at the time and in many rural areas where children were pressed into farm labor, education often wasn’t very high on a family’s list of priorities. Providing transportation was one way to encourage poor, rural kids to go to school.
The post-WWII development of suburbs put a new wrinkle into the mix as people began to move further away from their jobs. That was accelerated by the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education court ruling and the flight that resulted as white families in the South attempted to avoid integrated schools by moving to the suburbs.
By the 1970s, there was a large growth in two-income families where both parents work which resulted the rise of “latchkey kids.” School-based transportation was a central part of that cultural development where kids were home alone after school.
For their part, school officials didn’t want to limit transportation because they feared parents might not send their kids to school on a regular basis, a situation that would affect both education standards and state funding.

The world is different today. Just about every family has a car, if not multiple vehicles.
So why should school system continue to provide the massive amount of transportation they do? And why should one group of taxpayers who don’t use the system continue to pay subsidies for those who do?
Why don’t school systems charge a fee to those who use its bus system just as cities do for subway or bus services? Shouldn’t those who use public transit to school pay for a share of the cost?
If local school systems charge $10 a week per student for transportation, a lot of families would quickly figure out what their true priorities really are. I bet a lot of people would suddenly find a way to get their kids to and from school either themselves, or thorugh neighborhood carpooling.
The cost of school busing in Jackson County isn’t going to get any cheaper. The county school system needs to replace a lot of its older buses and it may have to pay a premium to hire enough bus drivers.
It really is insane how much the JCSS is having to spend on student transportation. So why not charge something to those who use it to help offset that cost?
Let families who depend on buses have some “skin in the game.” Let them pay something, just as families have to do for school lunches.
That’s the conservative way.
That’s the free market way.
That’s the sensible way to fund public school transit.
Mike Buffington is co-publisher of Mainstreet Newspapers. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.

Why must I contribute tax dollars for any school children? I never had kids and those who do that leave in apartments or rental properties don't contribute towards their children's school with property tax.

Duh Peter Fuller... oh yes I'm so glad to pay property taxes to pay for this generation of hand me everything on a silver platter because I'm entitled to it generation that has no work ethic or sense of value.

I'm going to make a guess that you're part of the "Me Generation" (yeah, I know you prefer "Baby Boomer"). Those millennials are going to end up paying a lot more for you and your mistakes than you ever did for them.

Why are you so mad? I am sure you utilize some tax payer paid services that I don't use, but that is fine because this raises our quality of life in the area. It would be nice if you would change your attitude to one of constructive anger, and become a problem solver instead of an insulting, generalizing, "Pick-a-fight" mentality. Hope your day improves.

He’s an idiot. Charge me to use the bus? Pretty sure that $70M budget that the school has to begin with comes from TAX dollars that we pay! Actually better said as taken. We don’t pay our taxes. They take them. What a waste of oxygen this man is.

There are some significant factors in the cost of bus transportation that are ignored in this article. The county's costs are dramatically increased by the fact that we operate three school systems in this county. Two of those systems cover a compact geographical area but the County does not have that option.
Bus transportation is critical to any public school system, especially one as geographically challenging as Jackson County. Our true issues are low graduation rates, high teen pregnancy rates and a paper which highlights a problem without suggesting any truly viable solutions for them.
Stirring the pot seems to be your primary function. We need serious discussion not silly ideas about terminating bus service. We need leadership in the community, the press and the government to work together to solve problems not just throw out preposterous suggestions about abandoning the population which the bus system is designed to serve.

Tim, I would agree that the county school system's bussing issues are not helped by the existence of the two city systems, but that is besides the point. The problem is a lack of drivers and a lack of funds to buy new, more reliable busses. If you will look on page 2A of this week (Dec. 6th 2017) issue you will see a breakdown of some local school system financial data. Among that is the fact that the county school system ranks 63rd in the state in its per pupil transportation cost at $596 per student. I see no problem with those who use the bus transportation system having to pay a direct share of that cost. The other alternative is to raise property taxes to buy more school busses and pay higher wages to lure more drivers. One way or another, the solution will cost money.
As for your designation of the county's "true" issues, we recently outlined the graduation rate problem and how all schools across the country have found ways to "enhance" their graduation rates in ways that may not serve the best interest of students. Still, the local school system have above the state average graduation rates, something that has been reported here.
I would disagree that Jackson County has a "high" teen pregnancy rate. Jackson County has among the state's lowest teen pregnancy rates at 12.5 per 1,000, ranking it 25th in state's lowest rates. The overall state rate is 14.4 per 1,000. That's not to say teen pregnancies aren't an issue, but it certainly isn't among the county's biggest problems.

I do not disagree with pay for what use service. However, there is another side of this story. If I do not send my child to a public school and they are taught at home by qualified parents or tutors or my child attends a private school do I get to keep my school tax and bond money? The government can't have it both ways...Take, Take and Take some more.

We all pay for services we do not use, and use some services that are worth more that what our taxpayer contribution is. Should they begin "billings by the hour or mile" for these things? Come on......it usually comes out about equal in the end. If not dollar to dollar for usage, then for the "soft" amenities". The things that go along with quality of life stuff in our community. And we all benefit from the financial benefits of "quality of life". If you don't like it, move to Montana, or wherever, become a homesteader and do all this stuff on your own. I am beginning to think that our area is over populated with mad as hell baby boomers who don't want to participate. If history serves, you baby boomers profited in many ways (financially, socially, emotionally) from the WWII and Korea years in which our ancestors served. How would they feel about this petty infighting?

Everyone benefits from the public school, not just parents of children currently attending. You benefit from having someplace for other people's children to be while those people work and contribute. You benefit from having children ready to enter the workforce and contribute. Thinking that it's just about your children and whether you personally have any in the school is short-sighted and selfish.

"You benefit from having someplace for other people's children to be while those people work and contribute" So exactly how do I benefit from subsidizing daycare?
"You benefit from having children ready to enter the workforce and contribute." Please rad the link below and explain how I am getting my money's worth.
https://fee.org/articles/the-failure-of-public-schooling-in-one-chart/

"Thinking that it's just about your children and whether you personally have any in the school is short-sighted and selfish."
The opinion article is about "subsidizing school bus transportation". My comments were related to subsidizing anything if it is not utilized. It's like buying groceries and someone else gets to eat them. Given enough time one would be too weak to work and generate revenue to buy the groceries. Then no one benefits unless the one eating the groceries can find another source of free groceries.

Kane the FDA and USDA are both large government bureaucracies that increase the cost of medical devices/drugs (FDA) and food (USDA). Also your USDA is now in the mortgage guarantee business which has nothing to do with food or agriculture. The costs of medical devices, pharmaceuticals and food are all higher because of the regulations these institutions put on the regulated industries they oversee.

Farm subsidies do little if anything to lower the cost of groceries. They are mostly lobbyist payoffs to enrich large corporate farms.

I do indeed harvest some of my own food, did educate my children with my own money while paying the required property tax to educate other children and did purchase my own WITHOUT a federally insured mortgage.

Considering my dad when I was quite young yes I did go to work at an early age to help support a widow a three orphans. It worked out pretty good. I appreciate you asking.

Douglas, you are to be commended. HOWEVER please be aware that it appears that "Kane" just wants to raise a ruckus and you will therefore never, unfortunately, win the argument. I have to wonder if "Kane" is the "Nancy K." of the prior negative comments, and if she is really the "Ms. K." who would post comments in a similar tone in the Madison County paper. But now that Madison County does not have a blog, she needs to get cranky on our blog. Just a thought.....

FYI you are the pot stirrer going by 2 different names alex and alexr. I had no further interest in engaging in this debate. So that would be a BIG HELL NO to I'm posting under the name Kane I'd post under my own name. And apparently you don't have much of a life if you have time to monitor all the newspaper blog sites. Love the way you accuse ppl of things you actually have no facts to back you up. So I'll assume you voted for Trump since you like to spew your own version of "fake news " good luck with the shit stirring. Merry Christmas

Signing off from the bullies. Won't read the Kane stuff anymore. Advise everyone else to do the same or s/he will continue to try to stir things up. She wants us all to be irrationally angry like s/he is. S/he has issues that don't pertain to us. The old "they're sick, we are well, so ignore it" philosophy needs to be in place. Just keep being objective in our comments and good stuff may happen.

Add Comment

Name

Email

Homepage

In reply to

Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: